Overview of consultation and survey work 2013/14
DATE: 12TH January 2014
OPCC youth consultation summary report
(part of the youth engagement plan 2013-2014)
OVERVIEW
The elected Police and Crime Commissioner for Derbyshire has both a legal and moral duty to engage and consult with young people.
Through wider consultation work with partners, the constabulary and the general public the Commissioner recognises that whilst younger people are seen by some as being a cause of anti-social behaviour, a disproportionate number within this community are also vulnerable to being victims of crime.
Pledging to the Youth Charter of England and Wales when elected the Police and Crime Commissioner for Derbyshire understands that to build a strong and transparent relationship with Derbyshire’s youth it is integral that their views are heard and represented.
The report forms part of the Commissioner’s Youth Engagement Plan which will play a key part of the wider community engagement programme for 2014.
Purpose The purpose of this report is to: Highlight the views of a representative group of young people (11-24 years of age) from across Derbyshire. To begin to help steer the focus for more detailed consultation and engagement work by the OPCC. Begin to identify potential recommendations for further analysis in relation to engaging and supporting younger people across Derbyshire. Younger people are in a position to make a valuable contribution to the work and decisions made by the Police and Crime Commissioner. There is no doubt that an
effective dialogue will play a key part to enable often under-represented voices the chance to be heard and help support the reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour.
INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS
The scope for this work began through meetings with partner agencies and relevant strategic and service leads across both the City and County. This helped to inform how and where this initial work would be carried out and what questions may be appropriate to ask younger people across Derbyshire.
Questions on which the consultations were based: 1. How or who would you report a crime to? Would you always report a crime? 2. Can you describe any contact or experience you have had with the Police service? 3. As a service, in your view what could the Police do more of / or better?
The young people consulted included those representing the following:
Secondary school Youth Councils Young Carers Young people at risk of Sexual Exploitation Mental Health Disability Deaf people Young offenders and ex-offenders Minority Ethnic Communities Children in or leaving Care Statutory partners who supported the consultation process: Multi Agency Teams (MATs)
Youth Offending Services (YoS) Voluntary and Community Sector organisations included: The Prince’s Trust Derby County in the Community Barnado’s leaving care service Oz Box YMCA The Enthusiasm Trust
189 young people were consulted. Most of these consultations were carried out in discussion groups led by the OPCC Community Engagement team.
Key findings (note that some participants gave more than one response):
All % are based on the total number of those consulted.
Question 1: How or who would you report a crime to? 52% referred to 999 as a means to report. 44% mentioned ‘the Police.’ 30% mentioned reporting a crime with a parent or guardian. 17% referred to the 101 service as a means to report.
Would you always report a crime? 31% would only report what they perceived as a ‘serious’ offence 25% would not report because of fear or the risk of bullying 24% either stated they would not report or left the question blank 24% said they might report depending on the offence 19% would probably not report if the crime involved family or friends
Would you always report a crime? 35%
30% Only report what they perceived as a ‘serious’ offence 25% Would not report because of fear or the risk of bullying 20% Would not report or left the question blank 15% They might report but it depends on the offence 10% Would probably not if the crime 5% involved family or friends
0%
Key messages from consultation sessions: reporting crime. It is not clear to many younger people how to report crime, especially non- emergency or persistent/petty crime. When asked the majority were not aware of the 101 service. Many appeared to lack confidence that they would be taken seriously if they reported a crime and some gave very clear specific examples when they felt they had not. Although frequently raised within sessions as an issue of concern, those consulted did not know any specific means or service of how to report hate/bullying or internet/cyber crime. Few had heard of CEOP. Most of those consulted would prefer to report via a text or online service. There was also strong evidence that those from the Deaf community specifically often felt ignored or not catered for appropriately when considering education and means of reporting crime. Some felt that there could be templates online or by text incorporated to help reporting crime easier. It was felt wording a report was quite difficult to structure/communicate.
“I would report a crime to 999 or 112.” “Serious then yes, minor then no!” “I would only report to the Police in Ozbox” “No, people would find out” “Snitches get stiches” “No, because I’m not a grass and wouldn’t want to get beaten up”
Question 2: How/why have you had any contact with the Police service? 28% felt they had not or left the question blank 24% mentioned School 14% said they had reported a crime 14% had spoken to an officer on patrol or a PCSO 12% had been stopped or searched by an Officer 2% shared that they had been arrested
Key messages from consultation sessions: contact and experience with the Police. A majority had negative perceptions of the Police (common responses were of a judgemental/discriminatory, distant and reactive service). However, many of the same group who expressed such views conversely had surprisingly positive feedback about their actual experiences with their local PCSO’s and being held in custody. There was a clear distinction often made between PCSO’s and ‘proper’ Police. Many of those asked could remember a member of the Constabulary coming into their primary school. However, the majority of those consulted could not think of any specific educational or information visit that had come from a Police Officer visiting their Secondary School or College. Most young people consulted only related experiences with the Police service when something bad or negative had occurred either locally or personally. It was mentioned that the Police service had often been used as a threat by adults and therefore a younger person would not be listened to.
“After a robbery at work the Police treated us fairly” “I was visited by a Police woman after my Mother found I was sending sexual pictures to someone. She was very professional and I felt I could talk to her.” “The Police are always around and always assume the worst.”
Question 3: As a service, in your view what could the Police do more of or better? 44% mentioned Police should be less judgemental and/or to have more trust in younger people 37% suggested more presence/patrols 33% suggested informative sessions / education 19% mentioned tackling/reducing alcohol related crime 19% had no suggestions 17% suggested more presence in or near Schools 9% mentioned petty crime such as dog waste, litter and smoking 4% mentioned better ways of tackling bullying.
Key messages from consultation sessions: what could the Police do more of / or better? The overwhelming response here related to Officers being more approachable and less judgemental. When questioned further it became clearer that many felt they were too often put into the same box or categorized too easily. The majority wanted to see or hear more from the Police within their communities. “”I think they could advise more in schools”
“Be more understanding to people/situations” “The Police could do more in the community.” “Do more on the internet bullying.” “Take complaints seriously” “Understand needs of deaf people, improve communication and learn BSL.” “Have more resources, they always look rushed off their feet!” “Online bullying because the Police never do anything about that.”
Partner and Constabulary Consultation: summary of initial findings As part of this consultation process we have so far met with over 40 partners who work and support younger people across Derbyshire. These have included members of the Constabulary, Council strategic leads, Community Safety Partnerships and a wide range of further statutory and non-statutory agencies.
Some excellent examples of engagement and diversionary work involving young people and the Police have been identified across both the County and City.
There have also been examples highlighted of good practice including on-line virtual drugs surgeries and specific uses of social media such as Facebook and Twitter.
The Constabulary have also organised successful youth initiatives such as the Cadets (in collaboration with Youth United) and Ozbox, which is a diversionary programme delivered to young people across the County and City.
Community Safety Partnerships have worked with diversionary activity providers such as “Extreme Wheels” and “Prison me? No way!” across C and D Divisions.
There also appear to be many bespoke activities which are force led; some examples include “Your Choice” events in ‘B’ Division and the upcoming internet safety play at the Royal School for the Deaf in ‘D’ Division.
So we can find examples of good practice but we recognise that there is perhaps a requirement for some further review as there is little evidence of any coordinated approach to education and communication either within Divisions or across the Constabulary as a whole. This may be due to a possible lack for any formalised means of sharing good practice or centred coordination between Divisions. In many respects the work here appears quite bespoke.
PCC Consultation Event : Stop and Search, Restorative Justice and E-safety
Police Headquarters, 5th June 2014
INTRODUCTION : WHY CONSULT?
Following on from a programme of initial consultation work and scoping which took place in the OPCC in the months beforehand, the Commissioner hosted a consultation event on 5th June 2014 at Police Headquarters. Over 100 young people took part in the event which formed a key part of the Commissioner’s Youth Engagement Plan, part of the wider PCC Community Engagement programme for 2014.
Purpose The purpose of the consultation was to: highlight the views of a representative group of young people (11-24 years of age) from across Derbyshire on three relevant current topics where the views of younger people are often under represented.
build on the themes identified inthe initial consultations with partners and young people within Derbyshire.
help support the direction and key considerations for the Commissioner's Youth Summit on 24th September 2014.
Topics discussed: Stop and search, Restorative Justice / Community Remedy and E-safety
The Commissioner’s initial scoping and consultation work with young people, police and partners helped to identify issues of significant relevance for this event. National and local topics also helped to form the basis of the consultation themes such as the new Anti-Social- Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 and consultation carried out by our partners. Event aims:
Listen to perceptions..
Although the focus was on three themes the event as a whole also aimed to challenge perceptions, enable all of those present to complete and further promote the wider PCC Youth Survey and also to give feedback about other areas of Policing.
Inspire..
A number of inspirational speakers took part including Dr Manny Barot who spoke about issues relating to Hate Crime. The event enabled youngsters to see the positive work of youth
organisations and workers fromboth statutory and non-statutory, Schools and the Police, working together in a unified, consistent way which delivereda powerful and important message for all those from across the County to take home.
Educate and inform..
The event was intended to be educational and informative about key issues that commonly involve younger people within the communities of Derbyshire.
Information was provided and highlighted on a large screen to inform the delegates how and where to report crime with a particular emphasis on promotion of the Crime-Stoppers led ‘Fearless’ campaign which targets younger people and encourages them to report anonymously. Who was consulted? 104 young people aged between 11 and 24 representing the following 18 organisations across Derbyshire:
Erewash Youth Forum Derbyshire Constabulary Apprentices Friesland School The Prince's Trust Glossopdale Community College Littleover Community School Pingle School Derbyshire County Council Multi Agency Team Apprentices Landau Forte School, Derby City Enthusiasm Trust Wilsthorpe School Framework Safe Project Aldercar Community College Sporting Futures JET Derby Derbyshire County Council Children and Younger Adults Apprentices
Several other groups were invited but were unable to attend on the day
Partners and attendees from the Commissioner’s Office, the Constabulary, Derbyshire County Council, Derby City Council, Erewash Borough Council, Enthusiasm Trust and the Princes Trust attended the event and assisted with facilitating discussions. Topics and questions used from mentors to support the consultations:
Theme Trigger questions
Stop and What are your thoughts about stop and search? Do you think it is an important Police power? Search What are your concerns relating to Stop and search? What are the benefits of stop and search? Have you had any experience of being stopped and searched? How did it/would it make you feel? If you were stopped and searched, would you know your rights? What could make you feel better about these powers? Any other comments/questions/concerns?
E-safety / Where do you mainly use the internet (e.g. at home, at school, etc)? Cyber Have you ever been told how to keep yourself safe online? If so, Bullying who by? Do you think your school takes cyberbullying seriously? Have you or your friends ever been cyberbullied? o Which methods have been used to cyberbully you / your friends? o Who has cyberbullied you / your friends? o Who have you / your friends told about being cyberbullied? What do you think motivates a person who bullies people online? What solutions do you think could be put in place to help resolve/deter cyber bullying and internet hate crime? What could the Police do more of / better in this respect?
Restorative There are a number of things that an offender could be Justice asked to complete as part of a Restorative Justice solution.
The ‘Community Remedy’ list below is currently being considered in Derbyshire through consultation with the public.
Q.1 From the following what would be your thoughts – good or bad - about each? ( three preferred choices to be selected following discussion) Mediation – use of a third party to bring together both parties to reach common agreement Face to face apology Structured diversionary activities, i.e. courses, training, Police and Crime Commissioner funded activities. Rehabilitation to offenders, i.e. alcohol treatment, anger management course Paying for damage caused to property. Reparative work to repair any damage caused, i.e. cleaning off graffiti Acceptable Behaviour Contract – written agreement specifying future behaviour Parenting Contract – similar to the above but is signed by a parent/guardian for U18’s. Written assignment / Research *Counselling *Shuttle Conference – allows the victim and offender to put their views to each other without meeting face to face Tenancy Enforcement – through social landlords, local councils, housing associations Q.2. Do you have any other suggestions for possible punishments / options for a restorative justice system?
Q.3 : table lead to give a scenario – mobile phone theft/mobile phone theft whilst drunk/ mobile phone theft with physical assault etc.. Should there always be a place for a Restorative Justice solution? Why? Why not? What would be your limits?
Stop and Search
Overview:
The majority of those who were consulted at this event had not undergone personal experience of being stopped and searched.(Other groups who may have had more experience of stop and search had been invited but were unfortunately unable to attend on the day) Stop and search was widely agreed as being an important power for the Police to use.
Officer training and approach; means and ways to educate young people about their rights/responsibilities and coordination of organisations to deliver clear messages were key themes raised in discussions.
“I found the discussions on stop and search and Restorative Justice the most interesting.” (Tessa, 15)
Key points from the consultation notes and feedback: Stop and search.
There was a perception that many “Young people are targeted” for Stop and Search and if that the power is often not used appropriately and “prevents good relationships between younger people and the Police.” The ‘ripple’ effect on a community of a stop and search could be very positive as a deterrent but equally very negative. Many individuals indicated that if it had happened to them they would feel bullied and offended, especially if the grounds had not been clearly explained. It was commonly felt that a stop and search could act as a catalyst to further distrust and poor community cohesion with the Police service. The video explaining the rights and responsibilities was generally well received within the feedback forms “the video’s especially stop and search were the best part at the start.” (Jordan, aged 16) “Learning our rights regarding stop and search was
the best part – lots of negative press is put on police officers abusing their powers and by letting people know their rights breaks down this barrier.” (Connor, aged 17) Male officers in particular were criticised for being intimidating from some examples where young people had been stopped and searched. It was also commented that stop and search was not only stereotyped by race but also gender “you wouldn’t see your mother being stopped and searched..” The experiences of those consulted who had been stopped and searched indicated that most felt that the process had been a lot less formal than on the video and they were not clear about their rights and felt embarrassed about the situation even though they hadn’t, , done anything illegal.??
It was also suggested that good examples of stop and search should be promoted by the Police within schools, flyers-posters and on websites/you tube etc. Most groups consulted said that the Police had not been to their school to talk about stop and search and they thought no information appeared to be available. How could this be improved? It was suggested that through primary schools and later in secondary school (year 11+) should be the time when Police enter schools and promote this information to young people. The misguided statistics for Derby when mixed with national statistics was also mentioned and that the true statistics about the locality should be conveyed to communities to help challenge the negative perceptions. Police delivering an educational message in person about rights would be clearer, more powerful and break down more barriers between young people rather than a teacher/youth worker delivering the message. Police should make more use of schools and partner groups/charities etc, to engage with young people and improve communication, use of social media and not just drop leaflets at youth clubs as they aren’t really used and nobody reads them..
Restorative Justice/Community Remedy
Overview:
Most attendeeswere not previously aware ofthe concept of Restorative Justice and Community Remedy so this was very new territory.
In some cases the terms and explanation of the available remedies had to be explained in detail.
Feedback was very positive regarding the explanations and clearly a lot of interest was shown from the young people consulted at the event.
Much positive feedback about the concept but concerns that a punishment ought to feel like a punishment to the perpetrator and that the victim had to be the absolute focus.
“Discussing restorative justice was the best part as it’s not something I was aware of.” (anon, 16)
“The discussions about Restorative Justice were the most helpful as I previously had no knowledge about any of it.” (Isobel, 17)
“Hearing other people’s views about the issues really made me think.” (anon)
“Discussing our opinions and seeing things from a different perspective was really useful.” (anon)
Key points raised from the consultation notes and feedback: Restorative Justice
It was highlighted that a similar system for discussing with a mediator has often been effective within a school environment as a means to tackle certain harassment and bullying. Opinion was divided on whether restorative justice remedies which rely on a face to face consultation/apology would work as a means to prevent crime. A consensus that ‘Community Remedy’ Solutions could be tailored to suit victims and individuals more. Questions were raised whether it would help the perpetrator more than the actual victim. Suitable for low level crime but not persistent crime. Community work and/or other diversionary activities could help offenders understand the consequences of their actions, be more socially aware and sometimes (with community work) add a greater social stigma which may serve as a deterrant. Face to face explanation may make offender less intimidating and understand reasoning so beneficial for the victim. Will the victim necessarily make the correct decision? What guidance would they have and would this always be appropriate? The system could develop into quite a ‘shallow’ process where people would just say the right thing to avoid a punishment or criminal prosecution. Shuttle conferences were largely seen as a poor idea that could lead to mis- interpretations and third parties adding statements to make the offender sound more regretful etc. Remorse – a difficult emotion to record. Rehabilitation was also seen as a ‘humane’ approach to take although there were concerns relating to cost and effectiveness. Many also clearly felt that a punishment should feel like a punishment as well as include rehabilitation/education and support.
E-safety / cyber bullying
Overview:
The majority of those who attended gave feedback suggesting they found the most useful and enjoyable topic of the day was discussing issues surrounding E-safety.
Nearly all consulted had experienced or knew people affected by some form of cyber bullying or harassment.
Police intervention often agreed as not the most appropriate way forward of tackling the issue.
“E-safety, I found the discussions really useful.” (Abbie, 15)
“Talking about cyber bullying… and whether people realise that they are being cyber bullied.” (Amani, 17)
“E-safety was the most interesting table for me as I am very involved with the internet and technology.” (Rajbir, 14)
Key points raised from the consultations notes and feedback: E-safety / cyber bullying
Most of those who attended felt that their school was taking e-safety very seriously and that the issue had been covered during classes and assemblies. The majority of those consulted felt that they had not received any information from the Police directly on the matter. Those who were not old enough to register with Facebook still admitted that they used it. It was felt that a large responsibility needed to be taken by the companies who ran social network sites and not necessarily the Police. Facebook, Facetime and texting were the most noted means of harassment and bullying. It was widely acknowledged that many people who would carry out such bullying may have wider mental health or behavioural issues and may be vulnerable and/or victims themselves. Many young people suggested a campaign could address this more..?
Nearly all of those consulted admitted to being or knowing someone who had experienced bullying and/or harassment through social media. It was mentioned that the police ‘don’t appear to do anything’ in cases where harassment by text has been reported. What is the best way to report such behaviour? Some campaigns felt like they were dumbing down and patronising younger people so this is why any campaign should be informed by young people. Embarrassment and also not knowing how/understanding the process were reasons that many gave for not reporting bullying via social media. There was a mixed response about how involved parents should be when it comes to keeping safe online. A generational and technological gap…? Anonymous e-mailing systems to authorities/schools that can deal with the issue were suggested as a good way forward as a deterrent and something to promote in schools. There was agreement that many young people do put themselves into vulnerable positions with cyber bullying including texts/sexting and that there should be more education and etiquette instilled. Reporting was constantly brought up as a difficulty because if it isn’t dealt with effectively “once you’ve grassed you get a name for yourself.” Social/cyber exclusion – the stigma related as a ‘grass’ was a concern as being a consequence for someone who has been known to report online. Understanding the law and definitions of hate crime/harassment/threats would be useful. Many asked ‘what is the definition of cyber bullying?’ Where is the line? A majority aware of CEOP but seems very distant and not entirely sure how it works. It was suggested that an e-mail ‘link’ service where offensive messages could be forwarded by text or e-mail to the Police so the message could be recorded.
Feedback about the event from participants
All attendees were asked to complete a feedback form about the event itself
90% felt the event was either useful or very useful. 45% (included in this) thought it was very useful. 10%) felt that the day was quite useful No one said that the day was not useful. 24% felt that the e-safety topic was the most interesting issue. 38% felt that the day could not have been improved.
What could have been improved: event feedback from participants
“Perhaps longer discussions” “We needed more time on the tables” “A larger mixture of groups” “More views from opposing sides” “A wider variety of issues could have been covered” “Smaller groups but more people because it would enable more people to speak up “Maybe with the videos let children that have had experience make them e.g stop and search” “More materials for the guests to take away and read” “We could have focused more on drugs and alcohol and discussion times could have been longer”
What worked: event feedback from participants
“Talking as a group” “The discussions around different topics” “Talking to each other about our thoughts” “The discussion around a whole table” “Being encouraged to talk openly” “Getting to find about 3 topics I had no knowledge of” “Talking to real officers”
“Conversing with the police” “The open level of interaction” “Being able to share my opinion and discussing ideas” “Discussing our ideas and seeing things from a different perspective” “The general discussion with a variety of people of different ages” “Learning about different procedures that are commonly used” “Discussing issues with mentors and learning about my rights” “Learning about different topics and most of the mentors were very good at engaging us, they spoke to us like adults” “I liked how we got to talk at tables which was a very good idea and then hear everyone’s views which was a very good addition to the event” “How friendly the mentors were and how comfortable they made you feel” “I appreciated how the mentors listened and recognised your point of view” “Every person had the opportunity to voice their opinions even if they are shy” “The speakers were very inspirational
Youth Survey 2014 Results
Results from 3,270 Youth Survey questionnaires completed by Derbyshire young people: 483 paper surveys from PCC youth engagement events, 70 completed online via the PCC website and 2,717 completed at school events conducted by Amelix.
Questions and analysis:
Q1. Have the Police visited your school / college / organisation in the last 12 months?
Base: All Responses.
Under 14-15 16-17 18-24 All Female Male White BME 13 yrs yrs yrs yrs Yes 71.7% 73.3% 74.1% 65.3% 68.3% 73.9% 71.1% 74.2% 56.0% Total No. of 3,270 1,458 1,241 118 142 1,561 1,442 2,683 268 Responses
What was the reason for the visit?
Base: Those who have had a visit. Respondents could choose more than one option.
Under 14-15 16-17 18-24 All Female Male White BME 13 yrs yrs yrs yrs Anti-social behaviour 33.9% 35.3% 37.0% 20.8% 13.4% 37.3% 31.4% 34.4% 29.3% awareness Bullying, harassment, 29.2% 28.5% 33.2% 14.3% 19.6% 29.5% 29.3% 29.9% 22.0% hate crime Drugs/alcohol 26.7% 25.4% 30.8% 26.0% 11.3% 28.1% 25.3% 27.0% 30.7% awareness General 22.6% 24.0% 22.9% 14.3% 9.3% 22.7% 22.7% 21.6% 26.7% police visit Cyber/ internet crime 10.6% 9.6% 7.2% 22.1% 38.1% 11.2% 10.0% 10.0% 14.7% awareness How to report 10.0% 10.9% 8.5% 9.1% 7.2% 8.6% 10.8% 9.4% 8.7% crime Other 16.6% 14.3% 16.0% 27.3% 30.9% 15.0% 18.4% 16.1% 16.0% Don't know 25.2% 25.5% 25.6% 13.0% 15.5% 22.8% 26.6% 25.1% 18.7% Total No. of 2,345 1,068 919 77 97 1,154 1,025 1,991 150 Responses
Q2. The Police deal with lots of issues. What do you think are the most important? Choose your top FIVE from the list below.
Base: All Respondents. Compared with provisional interim results from the OPCC/Constabulary all age public consultation ‘Over To You 2014’ – full results available December 2014.
Youth Over To You Significant differences Survey provisional between Youth Survey 2014 interim results and Over To You Chosen almost twice as Gun crime and gangs 43.0% 23.2% often by young people Chosen almost twice as Missing children 42.0% 22.2% often by young people Child abuse and child exploitation 41.7% 37.7% Drug taking 39.6% 37.1% Chosen more than two Human trafficking 31.9% 12.2% and a half times as often (for slavery/sex work) by young people Drug dealing and supply 27.1% 36.1% Stalking, harassment, bullying Chosen twice as often by 25.7% 12.6% (including through social media) young people Chosen almost half as Burglary 22.9% 40.1% often by young people Chosen almost twice as Online sexual offending 22.3% 12.5% often by young people Domestic abuse 22.2% 17.8% Robbery 21.7% 22.2% Underage drinking 17.9% 21.9% Online fraud and theft 17.6% 15.1% Chosen two-thirds as Alcohol related violent crime 12.3% 17.6% often by young people Chosen less than half as Street drinking 10.1% 22.6% often by young people Chosen less than half as Vehicle crime 9.9% 18.1% often by young people Chosen less than half as Speeding 9.8% 20.8% often by young people Chosen less than half as Dealing with repeat offenders 6.0% 14.8% often by young people Chosen less than a Safeguarding vulnerable adults 4.3% 18.2% quarter as often by young people Low level ASB e.g. dog fouling, Chosen less than a sixth 2.3% 14.3% litter, cycling on pavements as often by young people Chosen less than a fifth Inconsiderate parking 2.3% 13.1% as often by young people
I have no priorities 6.3% 3.0% Less than 5 priorities chosen 14.4% N/A
Q2. The Police deal with lots of issues. What do you think are the most important? Choose your top FIVE from the list below.
Base: All Respondents.
Under 14-15 16-17 18-24 Female Male White BME 13 yrs yrs yrs yrs Gun crime and gangs 40.4% 45.4% 52.7% 53.3% 41.9% 46.2% 44.2% 38.9% Missing children 42.0% 42.0% 53.7% 50.8% 47.3% 38.3% 43.1% 44.7% Child abuse and child 38.8% 44.5% 58.2% 57.3% 52.4% 33.8% 43.7% 39.3% exploitation Drug taking 45.4% 37.4% 22.2% 23.4% 39.3% 41.4% 40.8% 31.4% Human trafficking 27.9% 36.0% 44.2% 42.3% 33.8% 32.2% 33.2% 34.4% (for slavery/sex work) Drug dealing and supply 27.3% 25.4% 35.2% 42.3% 24.9% 30.9% 27.4% 27.9% Stalking, harassment, bullying (including 26.3% 27.9% 19.4% 22.4% 32.6% 20.5% 27.0% 24.9% through social media) Burglary 24.5% 21.3% 27.3% 26.0% 20.5% 26.2% 24.1% 17.3% Online sexual offending 22.6% 23.5% 15.4% 21.7% 27.0% 18.7% 23.3% 19.2% Domestic abuse 18.5% 25.6% 33.6% 33.4% 27.7% 17.6% 22.8% 24.3% Robbery 23.5% 21.0% 20.6% 23.9% 17.3% 27.5% 22.8% 18.6% Underage drinking 20.4% 17.0% 10.6% 8.1% 18.9% 17.2% 18.6% 13.8% Online fraud and theft 18.2% 17.2% 15.4% 16.3% 14.8% 20.9% 17.3% 19.7% Alcohol related violent 12.3% 13.0% 11.0% 13.0% 13.8% 11.3% 12.8% 11.4% crime Street drinking 9.7% 11.0% 8.9% 5.3% 9.5% 11.1% 10.0% 11.3% Vehicle crime 10.2% 9.9% 12.7% 10.7% 6.4% 14.3% 10.5% 6.6% Speeding 10.5% 8.8% 11.7% 6.7% 9.5% 9.7% 9.5% 10.4% Dealing with repeat 4.0% 7.2% 4.8% 10.9% 5.9% 6.5% 5.9% 7.1% offenders Safeguarding vulnerable 2.8% 4.4% 5.9% 13.4% 4.7% 4.1% 4.3% 5.7% adults Low level ASB e.g. dog fouling, litter, cycling on 1.9% 2.4% 2.4% 3.9% 1.8% 2.8% 2.2% 3.0% pavements Inconsiderate parking 1.8% 2.6% 1.7% 1.6% 1.8% 2.6% 1.9% 4.0%
I have no priorities 6.3% 3.9% 5.1% 1.4% 4.0% 5.3% 4.2% 7.5% Less than 5 priorities 15.9% 14.7% 4.2% 2.1% 12.6% 15.0% 13.5% 19.8% chosen
Q3. How would you prefer to report a crime? Choose ONE OR TWO ways from the list below.
Base: All Responses. Respondents could choose more than one option.
Under 14-15 16-17 18-24 All Female Male White BME 13 yrs yrs yrs yrs To a police 45.8% 48.1% 45.1% 50.8% 59.9% 43.9% 51.7% 48.3% 41.0% officer By phone 31.9% 31.8% 28.2% 53.4% 52.8% 31.4% 34.6% 32.3% 35.4% to the police To a family 31.1% 36.5% 31.2% 17.8% 12.0% 36.7% 27.5% 31.6% 32.1% member To a teacher 14.2% 15.3% 16.4% 9.3% 1.4% 15.1% 14.0% 14.4% 17.2% By text 8.0% 5.7% 9.9% 8.5% 14.1% 8.5% 7.7% 8.1% 7.1% to the police By email/ online to 6.9% 5.1% 7.7% 9.3% 14.8% 8.1% 5.8% 6.8% 9.0% the police To a support/ youth worker/ 6.7% 5.9% 8.0% 5.1% 5.6% 8.1% 5.5% 6.9% 4.5% social worker Don't know 8.1% 6.9% 9.7% 6.8% 4.2% 7.5% 8.0% 7.6% 11.2% Total No. of 3,270 1,458 1,241 118 142 1,561 1,442 2,683 268 Responses
Q4. Is there anything you think the police service could improve? Choose up to THREE.
Base: All Responses. Respondents could choose more than one option.
Under 14-15 16-17 18-24 All Female Male White BME 13 yrs yrs yrs yrs Nothing needs 16.8% 21.7% 14.7% 6.8% 4.9% 15.5% 18.9% 16.8% 17.2% improving More police patrols/ police 45.0% 47.7% 42.4% 55.9% 56.3% 44.7% 49.2% 46.9% 44.4% on streets Be more approachable/ 38.3% 36.9% 41.1% 42.4% 44.4% 42.3% 36.9% 39.4% 42.5% easier to talk to Not to be judgmental of 35.0% 29.8% 40.3% 49.2% 39.4% 38.4% 33.7% 36.0% 35.8% young people More presence 26.6% 28.1% 26.5% 28.0% 27.5% 27.1% 28.4% 27.2% 28.0% near schools More information/ 17.6% 13.8% 19.0% 23.7% 35.9% 17.2% 18.2% 17.1% 23.5% education Other 4.1% 3.1% 3.8% 11.9% 10.6% 4.7% 3.9% 4.2% 6.7%
Total No. of 3,270 1,458 1,241 118 142 1,561 1,442 2,683 268 Responses
Q4. Is there anything you think the police service could improve?
Base: All ‘Other’ Responses.
134 respondents made comments about other ways the police service could improve:
Attitude: not judging young people (13), be more friendly/caring (12), treat people equally (6) Service/visibility: deal better with crime (21), more police patrols/traffic officers (18), increased engagement (13), faster response times (8), easier contact (6) Other: underage smoking and/or drinking (7), more speed cameras (6), awareness of mental health issues (6), better officer fitness levels (5), individual miscellaneous issues (13)
Q5. Are you…?
Base: Those who provided a gender (3,003 Respondents).
Youth Survey 2014 Census 2011 (all ages) Female 52.0% 50.7% Male 48.0% 49.3%
Q6. What is your age group?
Base: Those who provided an age group (3,034 Respondents).
Youth Survey 2014 Under 11 years 0.2% 11-13 years 47.8% 14-15 years 40.9% 16-17 years 3.9% 18-24 years 4.7% Over 25 years 2.5%
Q7. What is your ethnic origin?
Base: Those who provided an ethnicity (2,951 Respondents).
Youth Survey 2014 Census 2011 (all ages) White or White British 90.9% 93.3% Asian or Asian British 4.1% 3.9% Black or Black British 2.1% 1.0% Dual Heritage 2.5% 1.4% Other 0.4% 0.4%